A few odds in BB39 have changed.
1.Another new scenery movement system.
2. Clarification of how to fall back.
3. Trying hard general.
Other stuff.
Tried cavalry a few more times. It does seem critical to send them in at the right time. Need to find a weakened ward to assault. Strong wards beat the cavalry to death.
New countdown seems to be working fine.
Artillery might need an upgrade nudge.
Generals upgrading units they join, have made generals much more decision orientated. I think this should be good.
I will start asking play testers how much time they are sending on 1.pre-game, 2.re-ordering and 3.zone changing. In terms of too much too little etc..
Time spent:
About half an hour doing the pregame prior to the first on table turn, a bit quicker with the new scenery deployment.
For us re-ordering and zone changing are just part of the game take no longer than shooting, morale, assaults etc.
We do find the assaults the most frustrating. Often very little difference between a quality ward, household, and a full ward of retinue, levy and a household.
Thanks Les
The 14 D6 "cap" has caused a lot of disgruntlement . i have put an explanation in the BB39.
Here are some thoughts.
Players will need to find ways in which to target wards with less than 14D6.
The intention is that players batter 14D6 wards against each other's 14D6 wards.
After the first clashes the wards will then fall below 14D6, thus players can then be more thoughtful about where to attack.
Players will not start the game having the knowledge and reassurance that their wards are better than those facing them.
Gamers always like to stack things in their favour before committing. This was the basis of WRG 5th edition i.e. match up your best with their worst, smash them and game over.
Things were not that obvious in WOTR. There was no fine calculation of who would prevail in the first clashes. That is a gamer thing.
Players need to get "stuck in" and then find the potential opportunities as the battle progresses.
Because B is historically based I want players to win by historical tactics.
A ward that loses a fight is not usually "spent" . It should be capable of 3 effective fights before being spent. This is where a wise player chooses carefully which units to put the hits on and which to preserve.
Therefore no easy and predictable wins for players.
This will allow indecisive players to sit there and see what happens, waiting for the time when his win is pretty sure.
The decisive player will act and then act again.
I have a frequent tactic (spoiling my secrets here) of putting a bluffing force in position, looking aggressive and watch the opponent "entrench"(surrender the initiative). That tends to keep him (with a larger force) busy for most of the game.
Normally Martin you have just one stratergy, Attack, Attack, at all costs Attack.
Thanks for this explanation, Martin. Your rules logic looks sound! Even if, as Les points out, your "Marschall Vorwerts" battle tactics might at times be questionable...? :)
BB39 will be out for playtesting once Les has worked his magic, I believe?
Not seen BB39 yet so can't comment on new scenery placement. Set up time in games so far has been fine. Pregame in particular is just right.
Attack, attack , attack. If it fails just do the same thing all over again. Very Stonewall Jackson.
I will get 39 out to all tonight......
In 40 (under construction) there are a few proposed considerations.
1. Observation of whether there are the right amount of attributes for generals. Is assaulter+2 and target+2 always the preferred option?
2. Are cavalry worth the price?
3. Are guns worth the price.
4. Is out of order too easy to put right.
5. Will the 14 D6 cap cause players to ?
6. Too many figures for entrants. More work on quick game.
7. Should this set be pdf only.
8. inclusion of the famous battles.
9. Non bow armed units.
10. Campaign system. a system that will include distance from London, distance from disembarkation, distance from estates. A system of distances and balances associated with those distances. Thus distances will be a major part in the campaign. which distance to minimise as a priority? Tricky. More anon.
In response to BB40
1. I think all attributes are worth having, you could have a max D6 that you can put on an aspect.
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. No but consider +/- for good/levie units
5. Yes, the 14 D6 is unpopular
6. I don't think so but don't meet many new players
7. No, I like a nice printed book but understand coast May prohibit this.
8. Yes as per the original set.
9. In clued in historical battles only
10. Distance could = fatigue = great losses before the battle
If I could chip in on some of these:
#6: I think it's currently a lot to paint up if you're doing both sides, and would personally like an "easy way in"
#7: I would very much prefer a paper version of the rules, but understand the cost / price point issue
#8: famous battles - yes please! As well as being useful in themselves, these scenarios will help explain how the rules work/size "in context" and thus be less abstract
A few quick thoughts.
4. Out of order can seem very easy to put right. I like the idea of making it harder for levy units.
7. Always prefer a proper printed copy of rules.
8. Famous battles would be great if included.
9. Non-bow units. Yes please. Just painting up PP pike armed troops and would like to use them!
10. Campaign system would be a big plus for me.
Nick
Thanks Nick.
Maybe a 5,6 to get back into order? Differing scores for quality but then that is a new complexity.
Have a basic 4+ for back in order with +/- 1 for quality
1. and 4. are interrelated. If the 14 cap is kept often the bonus is wasted. Maybe the generals, attack or target could affect disordered units in the ward when assaulting or defending.
2. No, could be an asset.
3. No. could be an asset.
4. No. works fine but could include a small modifier for troop type and or commander.
5. Yes it removes the difference between the two contenders and just becomes a game of dice.
6. No. If you are just starting you can use bare bases to get started, and add the figures as you have time to build up the painted figures. This is not a board game or a skirmish game.
7. No. In our play testing we use a tablet, but also print out the required sheets, play sheet, battle sheet and the key pages like scenario pages, table of contents, index, victory points etc, and do frequently have to hunt for the information for particular issues, like better units. When these rules are finished and revised in a year or so trying to only use a *.pdf will put returns coming back to the game.
8. Yes definitely. Which means you need 6. to be lots of figures.
9. Does this mean that you will have no bow armed units and the also have just bow armed units with no knights?
10. Martin you cannot resist a campaign system. Just look at all the past rule sets. Yet another 3 book rule set.
Low on arrows, works fine. We have been using this in the other direction with a normal shooting roll including low on arrows unless the shoot opts out and state he is not using low on arrows.